Josh Duhamel booted for Blackberrying while taxiing
Dec 5, 2010, 6:34 am
#16
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: RDU
Programs: OnePass
Posts: 772
I'd really like to see the scientific proof that any electronic device "interferes" with the nav system of a modern airplane.
That said, he still should have followed the rules and I don't blame the airline for booting him, no matter who he was.
That said, he still should have followed the rules and I don't blame the airline for booting him, no matter who he was.
Dec 5, 2010, 8:16 am
#17
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kingston, ON
Programs: AC*E, SPG Gold, Priority Club Gold
Posts: 111
Radio interference is more probable. I have had interference from my cell phone on VHF comms during flights on GA aircraft.
Considering the VHF comms on commercial aircraft are basically no different to my little Cessna I can see the concern.
I think the industry feels they have to 'big up' the effects to scare passengers into complying.
Besides, the day they allow cell calls throughout the flight is the day I quit flying. Its bad enough in the airport these days with 'johnny bluetooth' and the 'my job is so important everyone deserves to hear my conversation' attitude.
Dec 5, 2010, 8:35 am
#18
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: RDU
Programs: OnePass
Posts: 772
It doesn't....
Radio interference is more probable. I have had interference from my cell phone on VHF comms during flights on GA aircraft.
Considering the VHF comms on commercial aircraft are basically no different to my little Cessna I can see the concern.
I think the industry feels they have to 'big up' the effects to scare passengers into complying.
Besides, the day they allow cell calls throughout the flight is the day I quit flying. Its bad enough in the airport these days with 'johnny bluetooth' and the 'my job is so important everyone deserves to hear my conversation' attitude.
Radio interference is more probable. I have had interference from my cell phone on VHF comms during flights on GA aircraft.
Considering the VHF comms on commercial aircraft are basically no different to my little Cessna I can see the concern.
I think the industry feels they have to 'big up' the effects to scare passengers into complying.
Besides, the day they allow cell calls throughout the flight is the day I quit flying. Its bad enough in the airport these days with 'johnny bluetooth' and the 'my job is so important everyone deserves to hear my conversation' attitude.
You cannot tell mey my litte ipod causes THAT much problems.
Dec 5, 2010, 9:40 am
#19
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of ORD
Programs: AA Plat UA Premier
Posts: 9,154
Dec 5, 2010, 1:25 pm
#20
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,051
Hey, I think airlines are doing people a FAVOR with the policies prohibiting use. Americans are WAY too addicted to these "connectivity toys". They should thank God there's a time in their lives when they are made to detach for a while.
Dec 5, 2010, 1:45 pm
#21
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: AA Gold AAdvantage Elite, Rapids Reward
Posts: 38,326
Dec 6, 2010, 7:29 am
#23
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: BHM
Posts: 118
It's not even the whole flight, the rule is in place during "critical phases of flight includes all ground operations involving taxi, takeoff and landing, and all other flight operations conducted below 10,000 feet, except cruise flight. If you can't bothered to be without your little gadget for 10 minutes each way...
Here is what Patrick Smith has to say about phones and PEDs: (note the fact that he's an advocate of making passengers listen to emergency instructions)
http://www.askthepilot.com/index.php?s=safety+#cX-q11
Here is what Patrick Smith has to say about phones and PEDs: (note the fact that he's an advocate of making passengers listen to emergency instructions)
http://www.askthepilot.com/index.php?s=safety+#cX-q11
Dec 6, 2010, 7:59 am
#24
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,051
Further media reports say Duhamel was asked and told REPEATEDLY to shut it off, and he just laughed at it. He was deplaned as an "unruly passenger". I don't know if it was the captain's decision, but I'd say if he (or she) wanted Duhamel off the plane, everyone should support that decision. Regardless of the science of wireless devices, the crew is responsible for the lives on board, and if they convey their wishes to a passenger and just get laughed at and ignored, I'm 100 percent behind their ejecting any passenger.
Dec 6, 2010, 8:08 am
#25
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,972
It probably doesn't, but it certainly has the capability to cause interference. When I have my cellphone near my telephone or my computer speakers or other things with a speaker, I can often hear it do it's "poll". I don't think the concern is one cellphone per se, but what dozens of various devices might do with all the various harmonics that might be generated.
Dec 6, 2010, 12:14 pm
#26
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,051
It probably doesn't, but it certainly has the capability to cause interference. When I have my cellphone near my telephone or my computer speakers or other things with a speaker, I can often hear it do it's "poll". I don't think the concern is one cellphone per se, but what dozens of various devices might do with all the various harmonics that might be generated.
Dec 6, 2010, 1:07 pm
#27
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA 1K, Hyatt Globalist, Virtuoso Travel Agent, Commercial Pilot
Posts: 2,117
But how hard would that be to prove and settle the issue? They could have done this eons ago. When I first started flying back in the 60's or 70's, there was some precursor of this. With all that time to do it, how could they NOT come up with proof that would satisfy all fliers?
Dec 6, 2010, 1:13 pm
#28
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,972
Absolutely impossible, given the number of different possible electronic devices at each various seat location. And you'd have to redo the test when even the slightest change was made to the aircraft's electronics, including such minor things as rerouting cables. And if you finished, you'd only have done the certification for the electronic devices that existed at the time it was done. It'd be completely hopeless to "prove" any such thing.
Dec 6, 2010, 5:40 pm
#29
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Orlando
Programs: Delta-Million miler
Posts: 1,312
Scientific proof..
Scientific proof may not exist but I don't want to risk my life because you want to reach out and someone or shut out the world or text someone. There are reasons why scientific prrof may not exits, a) no one has tested it, b) no one has tested it under ideal conditions, c) no one has tested it when several users try to use their devices at once, d) not all kinds of devices could be tested; there may be devices that could affect the flight, e) people might bring home made electronic devices or devices that couldn't be tested in advance, and many others.
I don't think that any agency would create a rule deliberately to annoy passengers.
I don't think that any agency would create a rule deliberately to annoy passengers.